I Oppose The Fake-a-buster, Support A Talking Filibuster

Let the people be heard

Joe Biden is frantically trying to stake his claim to history by scrapping the fake filibuster, the one where absolutely no debate takes place and it's used only to obstruct legislative progress. I'm all in favor of canning the fake-a-buster for a return to a genuine talking filibuster.

In a genuine filibuster of unlimited debate, somebody is always talking. But in a fake-a-buster, nobody is ever talking. The entire process of debate comes to a screeching halt and everybody goes about other things. This is the exact, polar opposite of the intention of the filibuster.

A genuine filibuster is predicated on the concept of unlimited debate, the idea that we don't vote on legislation until everybody who has something to say says it. Once everybody has spoken their piece, then we vote.

I support a talking filibuster because these are elected officials, elected to represent their constituents. Their constituents have every right to be heard through the voice of their elected representatives, and it's wrong to arbitrarily short-circuit that process.

Having a 60-vote threshold to close debate is sound. At some point, debate has to be brought to an end, and if 60 members of the Senate say it's time, then it's time. I say we dump the fake-a-buster in the ash can of terrible ideas and get back to allowing our elected representatives to actually represent their constituents.